Ajith Kumar K. v. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. Ltd.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2015/2ND SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 21701 of 2015 (K) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
----------------
1. AJITH KUMAR K., AGED 44 YEARS KARTHIKA BHAVAN, KURATTIKKAD, MANNAR PO ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT
2. SAJITH KUMAR K KARTHIKA BHAVAN, KURATTIKKAD, MANNAR PO ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT BY ADVS.SRI.N.SUKUMARAN (SR.) SRI.S.SHYAM SRI.N.K.KARNIS SRI.KIRAN PETER KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S):
-----------------
1. KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATIONS CO. LTD.
MUNNAR, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER K.D.H.P HOUSE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685612
2. THE SENIOR MANAGER ENGINEERING, KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATION CO.LTD K.D.H.P HOUSE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612
3. THE SECRETARY, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT , MUNNAR-685 012 R BY SRI.ARUN THOMAS, SC, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 21701 of 2015 (K) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ---------------------------- EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DT. 5/5/15 TO THE BUILDING NO. 1X/248 EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKY TO THE PETITIONERS DT. 24/1/15 EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BYT EH 3RD RESPONDENT DT. 18/6/15 EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE DT. 4/4/15 EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT. 3/6/15 EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF TAX DT. 20/5/15 EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WPC NO 15122/14 DT. 12/8/14 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
------------------------------ //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE.
V.CHITAMBARESH, J.
--------------------- W.P (C) No.21701 of 2015 --------------------- Dated this the 24th day of July, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The order of status quo in W.A.Nos.227, 224 and 574 of 2001 does not disable the respondents from providing the electricity connection to the petitioners if the same is otherwise in order. So is the case with regard to the order of status quo in CMP.No.951/1995 in OP.No.551/1995 or the order in SLP.CC.Nos.5049, 5066 and 5067 of 2007.
2. Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to provide the electricity connection to the petitioners if the application put in for the same is otherwise in order. The needful shall be done within a period of two weeks from today.
The Writ Petition is disposed of.
Sd/- V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.
nj.